I believe that Levin was mostly persuasive in his argument and he made me think about what I would do in a situation that involved a terrorist. The only problem with his argument is that he was not using realistic examples in his writing. Levin states that torture can be morally mandatory, justified, and can prevent future evils. I still agree that torture could be necessary if truly needed, but I believe he could have made a better argument for his position on the
George Galloway once said “ Anyone will say anything under torture”. Torture is used in different ways, But mostly torture is used to gather information from someone that is believed to be involved in a terrorist act. So I think torture should be legal to use when needing to get information although I think there should be precautions to take before you torture. Everyday there could be torture going on in the government secretly on many people because these people are believed to have information on terrorism or terrorist attack. A professor at Harvard Law school Alan M. Dershowitz said “ A carefully designed judicial procedure is more likely to reduce the amount of torture actually conducted, by creating accountability and a
Academic Search Complete. Web. 08 Feb. 2016. This source explains that torture is actually one of the last methods used when they are interrogating someone since many know that it has a very low success rate. If the person is not willing to cooperate, they go down a list.
In Michael Levin's The Case for Torture, Levin provides an argument in which he discusses the significance of inflicting torture to perpetrators as a way of punishment. In his argument, he dispenses a critical approach into what he believes justifies torture in certain situations. Torture is assumed to be banned in our culture and the thought of it takes society back to the brutal ages. He argues that societies that are enlightened reject torture and the authoritative figure that engage in its application risk the displeasure of the United States. In his perspective, he provides instances in which wrongdoers put the lives of innocent people at risk and discusses the aspect of death and idealism.
Many say no torture because they fear it would “corrupt democratic institutions, diminish our moral authority in the world, cause torture to become routine and widespread in society, and arouse worldwide resentment and anger towards us” (688). They would say that torture is not morally permissible, and does not truly work. A non-consequentialist might believe that torture disregards human life, and is disrespectful, no matter what the other has done. They would say that the answer to torture “is an absolutist no - torture is the use of a person merely as a means, a clear instance of a lack of respect for a human being. Torture is therefore always wrong” (687).
While analyzing “The Torture Myth” and “The Case for Torture”, it is very clear to see the type of rhetorical appeals used to persuade the audience. Anne Applebaum, the writer of “The Torture Myth” --in context of the decision of electing a new Attorney General--would argue that torture is very seldomly effective, violates a person’s rights, and should be outlawed due to the irrational need upon which physical torture is used. On the other hand, Michael Levin strongly argues that physical torture is crucial to solving every imminent danger to civilians. Levin claims that if you don’t physically torture someone, you are being weak and want to allow innocent people to die over something that could have been simply done. Physical torture is pressuring
The subject I am looking into is torture and the first article I am looking at is Torture-The Case for Dirty Harry, written by Uwe Steinhoff. Uwe Steinhoff is arguing that torture might just be more justifiable and morally okay than what most people may think. Steinhoff’s first argument towards this point is that people kill other people, and some killings are justified. Therefore, considering that torture is seemingly better than being killed, torture should be justified in that way that some of these killings are justified. A man by the name of Henry Shue counters this argument by basically saying that killing someone in combat may be do them greater harm than torturing them, but killing someone could remove the possible other harm that
Torture on Prisoners of War Through the years torture has been used repeatedly. Torture is the infliction of severe physical and mental trauma for the use of acquiring information or for the use of punishment. Although there has been call for reform at many stages in history, torture remains. Even the Geneva Convention outlawed torture, however, torture is still used by many nations, such as the United States. Evidence proved this with the publicity of the Abu Ghraib incident, where many inmates were tortured by United States soldiers.
Torture is the action of willingly hurting a person psychologically or physically. The use of torture by individuals, groups, and authorities has been going on from ancient times until today. In the 4th Century, voices started being raised against the use of torture. In fact, well-known philosopher and scientist, Aristotle, revealed the downfalls of torture, “those under compulsion are as likely to give false evidence as true, some being ready to endure everything rather than tell the truth, while others are really ready to make false charges against others, in the hope of being sooner released from torture”. In order to prevent further terrorist attacks, the CIA had to practice unethical questioning methods such as psychological techniques, sensory bombardment consisting of subjecting the tortured to continuous extremely
Is torture ethical? Torture is a controversial topic and has been at the center of discussion for decades past. Torture is defined as the “act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information” (Dictionary.com). In George Orwell’s, 1984 the government uses torture as a method of manipulation and paranoia on the citizens. Winston lives in a constant fear and cannot go a day without being paranoid about being turned in by the thought-police.